E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Portland, "America's ultimate White City"

Here's an interesting take on Portland. It first appeared a couple of years ago, but we must have missed it:

As the college educated flock to these progressive El Dorados [such as Portland], many factors are cited as reasons: transit systems, density, bike lanes, walkable communities, robust art and cultural scenes. But another way to look at it is simply as White Flight writ large. Why move to the suburbs of your stodgy Midwest city to escape African Americans and get criticized for it when you can move to Portland and actually be praised as progressive, urban and hip? Many of the policies of Portland are not that dissimilar from those of upscale suburbs in their effects. Urban growth boundaries and other mechanisms raise land prices and render housing less affordable exactly the same as large lot zoning and building codes that mandate brick and other expensive materials do. They both contribute to reducing housing affordability for historically disadvantaged communities. Just like the most exclusive suburbs.

After I left Portland and moved back to Dallas, I had a lot of people tell me that they weren't listening to my warnings about available jobs or unaffordable housing, because they wanted to move to a place where "everyone is just like me!" They thought they meant "edgy and artistic and fun," and they got it, all right. It's just a damn shame that bringing in people "just like me!" meant that Portland looked like it was hosting the casting call for the part of Rick in a revival of the Britcom The Young Ones, particularly with the cries of "Hands up: who likes me?"

There's never been a large African-American population anywhere in the Western US with the exception of a few places like the southern half of Los Angeles or Oakland... I'm tired of articles that equate diversity solely with what percentage a city has of black people. Portland's not going to become a popular destination for more black people to move regardless of whether this city looks like it did in 1971 or 2011. More black people I know in Portland have stated would rather move to Texas or Atlanta or North Carolina if they were to leave Oregon.

White people from Wisconsin or Ohio who chose Portland over upscale Midwestern suburbs aren't the reason Oregon lacks diversity. At this point most of those Midwestersn cities have few white people left in inner-cities to flee to the suburbs, and the trend is reversing while neighborhoods in many cities become more gentrified. Guess what, if well-meaning liberal white folks move into African-American neighborhoods instead of moving to lily-white suburbs or places like Portland--those neighborhoods eventually become more like--uh, Portland.

"Urban growth boundaries and other mechanisms raise land prices and render housing less affordable exactly the same as large lot zoning and building codes that mandate brick and other expensive materials do."

So both mandating small lot sizes AND mandating large lot sizes increases their cost? Huh?

The issue here is not race but income. Poor people generally don't own the land on which they live and are forced by basic economics to move on when their neighborhood becomes popular. In many communities the poor people are not white, but the result is the same. With the growing income disparity in the US we can expect this phenomenon to increase regardless of our intentions.

PMG: So both mandating small lot sizes AND mandating large lot sizes increases their cost? Huh?JK: Basic economics: it s the UGB creating an artificial shortage of land that makes, even small, lots expensive. Metro’s screwed up policies have doubled the cost of housing in Portland. (It would be hard to design a more effective minority removal program than’s Metro’s without passing laws banning minorities.)

Many of the policies of Portland are not that dissimilar from those of upscale suburbs in their effects.

Portland is an upscale suburb. It has some tall buildings, but of all the major West Coast cities, it is at its core comfortably suburban in a way San Diego or Los Angeles or San Francisco or Oakland or Seattle is not. Which explains why Adams, city hall, and the council operate more like an HOA than a real city government.

The overt goal of Portland land-use policies is to "build up, not out." But building UP only makes financial sense if the underlying dirt is expensive. The way planning advocates ensure that outcome is through the use of Urban Growth Boundaries and rural downzoning, to take cheap land off the market.

So it always amazes me that self-styled "affordable housing advocates" always support tight UGBs. I guess they do it because they know they will be subsidized to make up for the problem zoning caused. That helps to explain the local fascination with Urban Renewal.

I always get a huge laugh when Portlanders praise the city for its diversity. It's true, Portland has white people with blonde hair, white people with brunette hair and some redheads. When I first arrived here from a real city that is actually diverse and noted the stark absence of diversity here, a Portlander told me there was no racism and no anti-Semitism here. Seriously? The truth was that there was no one here with a strong enough voice to raise the issue so it didn't exist.

I did research on this issue. It is a mistake to associate race with income because there are 5 million black households with incomes above $50,000 and that is about the 50-50 point of household income in Portland. Portland is generally unattractive because the amenities and culture are very white. A friend of mine who headed HR at a very large organization said it was very difficult to recruit non-white professionals to Portland. They would come out, visit the city, and go home.

No matter what percentages we are, what is wrong with a difference in race/culture percentages?

Someone has to be higher or lower than someone else. Are we to advocate busing of citizens from one city to another like we use to for schools? Should we bus Mexicans to North Dakota, or whites to Atlanta because they are below the national averages?

Portland is an upscale suburb. It has some tall buildings, but of all the major West Coast cities, it is at its core comfortably suburban in a way San Diego or Los Angeles or San Francisco or Oakland or Seattle is not.

Portland is just a suburb that doesn't want to admit it's a suburb. When the Portland cheerleaders talk about how great the "city" is...they of course talk about SoWhat and the Pearl, while forgetting that Portland exists all the way out to S.E. 174th Avenue. Which, by the way, according to Google Earth, the corner of Powell & 174th is nearly 9.6 miles from City Hall (straight-line distance)...while my home in "exurbia" Tigard is a mere 8 miles from City Hall.

Raphael, I'm reminded of Lenny Bruce's routine about how Minnesotans were all for the Civil Rights Act solely because there weren't enough blacks in the state to affect them one way or another. And then he added "But they sure kick the shit out of their Indians."

So non-white professionals are completely justified in not moving to an area because it's too white, but if white people move here because it's white, that's wrong. I don't believe we have a lot of professionals of any race moving here. Economics and job opportunities stretch across racial boundaries.

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 80
At this date last year: 89
Total run in 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269